Under Rated Images

[Rodd]

This may be controversial, and wingee in nature, but there are few indications of image quality that can be imparted without detailed discourse, and the Like button is one of them.  This post is really about my collection on Astrobin and not a complaint about SGL. 

One more thing--the number of likes on Astrobin is different than the number of likes on SGL.  On SGL 20 likes is allot, as images are only on the first page for a little while, and not that many people view them compared to Astrobin--where the images remain visible for all time, and where the benchmark for IOTD I believe is 100 likes, and image of the year or what ever they call it, 200 likes.  

Rodd

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

In my view numbers of likes have a lot of randomness. On SGL, there are certain imagers that I tend to follow more than others, often more for historical reasons (e.g., I met them in person at some time, or we share some interest), rather than because they are really better imagers than those I follow less closely. It is also impossible to check out the torrent of images on sites like SGL, and even just taking time to judge all submissions in the SGL competitions can be quite a bit of work. Also, I might be more inclined to like a reasonably good image taken with basic equipment by a novice than a clearly better image taken with high-end equipment by a seasoned imager. Likes might also reflect the fact that the images contains a rarely seen or very distant object, even if the visual impact is less than that of objects we see frequently.

Therefore, a like says nothing about what the person pressing the button likes about the image (quality? object? processing? improvement since last time?). Not getting many likes says even less, because fewer people may have actually found your image. I sometimes get the impression that posting the same image at different times can result in different numbers of likes.  Of course I like getting likes as much as anybody, but actual comments and feedback mean a lot more.

[Rodd]

12 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

On SGL, there are certain imagers that I tend to follow more than others

True for SGL--but on Astrobin teh community is much more global I think--larger and less personal.  I think it's different there.  To support this, I point out that certain judgments are based on teh number of likes.  But, even there--the number of likes is a GENERAL way to judge an image.  Even on SGL great images will get more likes than poor ones.  There is a correlation between likes and image quality.

Rodd

[vlaiv]

Here is one thing that can explain difference in like counts, next to already excellent points above.

Expectations - Expectation bias. In various forms.

Many people don't really have idea of what should object look like, and form their opinion on object imaged from various previous images. Produce image that is not in line with this "generally accepted" appearance - less likely that it will be liked. People expect certain object to look in certain way (just look at opinions on green in SHO images for example).

Here is another example of expectations on my part - I'm more likely to give a like to novice imager for their "non perfect" image than to experienced imager with their "almost perfect image".

I don't expect much from novice imager and I like to encourage people and praise their effort rather than achievement in this case. On the other hand, if person is experienced imager, small imperfection just becomes this apparent thing in the image, as I'm inclined to expect almost perfect rendition from someone rich in experience (based on their previous work). Almost like opposite - with novice I'm being maybe too forgiving - with experienced folk its almost like being too harsh.

 

[vlaiv]

4 minutes ago, Rodd said:

But, even there--the number of likes is a GENERAL way to judge an image.

You need to be careful with such statements - it's like saying that quality of Picasso should be judged by general public.

Not likely that it would generate much likes. Ask art critics on the other hand and you will see very different results.

[domstar]

Well, I clicked on this post because I remember seeing your pictures and being impressed. Probably only you, ollypenrice and  astroavani ring a bell for me as someone who always makes quality images (I know there are plenty of others out there too but I can't remember them.)

I'm purely visual so I don't take a close interest in this, and I know you are working on a higher level than I can really appreciate and I don't even look at astrobin, but even so, when I saw your name I expected to see a top-notch image.

 

[PhotoGav]

Likes are nice, but if you like your own image, then that's all that really matters. Unless you are producing the image for somebody else, in which case it doesn't matter if you like it, it only matters that they like it!

Don't get hung up on likes. As Michael says - the number of people that see your image will hugely depend on when you post the image and how many other posts are flying about at that time. It also depends on the rarity of the image. If you post another image of the Orion Nebula that is pretty good, but at the time of year when the place is saturated with Orion Nebulae... it's going to take one hell of an image to elicit anything more than a viewer passing on to the next post quickly!!!

The best feedback possible is in the comments. If somebody takes the time to write a comment then your image touched them. Even better if it touched them to write a helpful bit of advice on how to make your image (or imaging) that little bit better. I don't think a perfect image has ever been posted, anywhere, ever. We all do our best to get as close as we can with the equipment and skies that we have at our disposal.

Even better still, write a comment on somebody else's image and encourage or help them to improve...!

I do like your images though, good or bad, they are always interesting and challenging. And, you have improved hyper dramatically since a while back when I used to think that your images were 'over processed' - none of that these days. Always worth looking at a Rodd image!

Having said all of the above... I like a like as much as the next person. I don't have stuff on Astrobin (well, I do, I have two images that I put up yonks ago, but for some reason just don't use Astrobin... perhaps I should), but I do find that the SGL viewers are a very discerning bunch. A very useful set of critics that only offer their love when it is appropriate to do so. If an image isn't getting the SGL love, then it generally doesn't deserve it!!!

If you've read this far, please now like this post...... ?

[Rodd]

27 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

You need to be careful with such statements - it's like saying that quality of Picasso should be judged by general public.

Not likely that it would generate much likes. Ask art critics on the other hand and you will see very different results.

There is a difference--there is a technical/scientific judgment with AP that transcends mere aesthetics-star sizes, the proper palette for LRGB, no artifacts from sharpening, no ringing around stars, no artifacts from noise control, I could go on and on....and so could you.   I maintain that if you look back at teh images that received the most likes (excluding ones that were given to newbies for encouragement), there will definitely be more likes given to astounding images than mediocre ones.  There is no question about this.

Rodd

[Kinch]

Hi Rodd....I like what Michael said: 

31 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

actual comments and feedback mean a lot more.

Like you I have seen images with many many likes (and even APODs) that did not require a lot of processing work. So, "likes" have nothing to do with the work you put into producing the image - it is just that (in perhaps a great many instances) they grab someone's attention for a fleeting second and they just have to press the button.

Of course many images deserve universal praise on all fronts - but I don't think these are showing up on AstroBin everyday. 

Kinch. 

[Rodd]

33 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Here is one thing that can explain difference in like counts, next to already excellent points above.

Expectations - Expectation bias. In various forms.

Many people don't really have idea of what should object look like, and form their opinion on object imaged from various previous images. Produce image that is not in line with this "generally accepted" appearance - less likely that it will be liked. People expect certain object to look in certain way (just look at opinions on green in SHO images for example).

Here is another example of expectations on my part - I'm more likely to give a like to novice imager for their "non perfect" image than to experienced imager with their "almost perfect image".

I don't expect much from novice imager and I like to encourage people and praise their effort rather than achievement in this case. On the other hand, if person is experienced imager, small imperfection just becomes this apparent thing in the image, as I'm inclined to expect almost perfect rendition from someone rich in experience (based on their previous work). Almost like opposite - with novice I'm being maybe too forgiving - with experienced folk its almost like being too harsh.

 

But you can't base it on what you do.  You need to look at a larger population.  And most people judging these on SGL are not idiots--they know their stuff and how to look at an image from a technical perspective.  Give them some credit.  Why do Ollys images, and Peters images, and Barry's images, and Sarahs images get many, many likes?  becuase they are really good images.  I do not see how you can deny this

Rodd

[Rodd]

6 minutes ago, Kinch said:

Hi Rodd....I like what Michael said: 

Like you I have seen images with many many likes (and even APODs) that did not require a lot of processing work. So, "likes" have nothing to do with the work you put into producing the image - it is just that (in perhaps a great many instances) they grab someone's attention for a fleeting second and they just have to press the button.

Of course many images deserve universal praise on all fronts - but I don't think these are showing up on AstroBin everyday. 

Kinch. 

Astrobn tends to be a like place--not a personal critique place like this forum.

Rodd

[Kinch]

"Astrobn tends to be a like place--not a personal critique place like this forum. "

That's why I don't post there anymore.

…..mind you, I don't post my images here either.....perhaps I should to get some honest critique.

 

[Rodd]

24 minutes ago, PhotoGav said:

Likes are nice, but if you like your own image, then that's all that really matters. Unless you are producing the image for somebody else, in which case it doesn't matter if you like it, it only matters that they like it!

I disagree with this--when one is learning AP, they need to rely on likes as they are trying to improve.  And despite what everyone seems to be saying on this thread--there is a direct correlation between likes and image quality--most of the time.  Will an image that gets 20 likes be better than an image that gets 18--no.  But a grainy, blurry, poorly guided, and out of focus image will not get as nmany likes as one of Olly's masterpieces.  There is no doubt.

Rodd

[Rodd]

37 minutes ago, domstar said:

Well, I clicked on this post because I remember seeing your pictures and being impressed. Probably only you, ollypenrice and  astroavani ring a bell for me as someone who always makes quality images (I know there are plenty of others out there too but I can't remember them.)

I'm purely visual so I don't take a close interest in this, and I know you are working on a higher level than I can really appreciate and I don't even look at astrobin, but even so, when I saw your name I expected to see a top-notch image.

 

Thank you!  I am sorry if I disappointed (no image).  But feel free to click on teh links above.

Rodd

[Rodd]

7 minutes ago, Kinch said:

"Astrobn tends to be a like place--not a personal critique place like this forum. "

That's why I don't post there anymore.

…..mind you, I don't post my images here either.....perhaps I should to get some honest critique.

 

I post there mostly to keep my images safe--they are all in one place and will always be there.  I have lost data due to failed drives and do not want that to happen to me again.   DSO browser is good for that too--though much more difficult to add versions of the same image.  Also, AB is a great place to view other images for planning purposes, framing, focal length etc, as there are a lot of images.

Rodd

[Rodd]

43 minutes ago, PhotoGav said:

but if you like your own image, then that's all that really matters.

I like accurate images that are well processed.  This is not 100% art.  This is photography, which has art AND technique, and IMO a duty to portray reality as it is.  I don't want to get into the narrow band color debate now.  But even that is based on teh spectrum (except ha is not really green).  But for RGB work, and galaxy imaging, there is an element of a documentary to AP).  If someone produced an image with a Green M1 (LRGB), there would be many comments about it regardless of whether people like green.  take a look at teh best images of Saturn, teh Moon, Jupiter etc--they are depicting reality, We are really producing landscape photographs--not paintings.

Rodd

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

Therefore, a like says nothing about what the person pressing the button likes about the image (quality? object? processing? improvement since last time?). Not getting many likes says even less, because fewer people may have actually found your image. I

Not true--the number of views is recorded too. 

Rodd

[vlaiv]

I think I'm missing the point of this thread (probably entirely my fault).

What are we discussing here? Mechanisms by which people like images? "True" comparison between two images in terms of "likes deserved"? Fact that there are "under liked" images out there?

All or none of the above?

 

[Adam J]

Ok.... at the risk of being a little off, who has given a 'Like' to an image posted by someone new just for encouragement, or to say well done, or because they did something that would never make image of the day in a million years but was great considering the equipment, location or experience level.  You dont have to think its a great image to hit the like button and to be honest I have not hit the like button in the past for some good images as considering the £30k worth of equipment they are using on top of a mountain....was it really as good as it should have been?

 

[RayD]

I tend to like an image only if the person posting it is seemingly at least moderately happy with it themselves.  I don't care if that is Olly or a very first image by someone from a smart phone.  In fact, I would say that I tend to like the latter more as that person is more likely to be looking for encouragement than praise.  Better images I would critique if valid as the poster probably already knows it's a good image, so the like is largely academic.

This aside, I just looked and you have won 12 days of most liked content, with the last being on January 27th (2 weeks ago), which is pretty good going for someone who posts pretty much exclusively in the deep sky imaging forum.

 

[Rodd]

27 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

I think I'm missing the point of this thread (probably entirely my fault).

What are we discussing here? Mechanisms by which people like images? "True" comparison between two images in terms of "likes deserved"? Fact that there are "under liked" images out there?

All or none of the above?

 

 

15 minutes ago, Adam J said:

Ok.... at the risk of being a little off, who has given a 'Like' to an image posted by someone new just for encouragement, or to say well done, or because they did something that would never make image of the day in a million years but was great considering the equipment, location or experience level.  You dont have to think its a great image to hit the like button and to be honest I have not hit the like button in the past for some good images as considering the £30k worth of equipment they are using on top of a mountain....was it really as good as it should have been?

 

Consider:  Not all images that get some likes are good.  But, truly good images will get a lot of likes (please don't make me prove this by going through the SGL pages and documenting this).  It is true.  There is no question this is true.  There are poeple who are teh exception.  I am not interested in teh exceptions for this issue.  The good astro photographers that are on SGL will either like an image or comment favorably on the image (or critique it).  I have already been through this same complaint for content as opposed to likes.  This one happens to target likes ( in general not specific to SGL--but really its the same).  All teh same thing really.  If you get few comments and few likes the posted image is not thought highly of by people whose opinion matters.  

[Rodd]

15 minutes ago, RayD said:

which is pretty good going for someone who posts pretty much exclusively in the deep sky imaging forum.

Is this important?  Not making the connection.  And--remember, I am not speaking about SGL really., though I have in teh past to a lesser extent

Rodd

[Rodd]

20 minutes ago, RayD said:

I tend to like an image only if the person posting it is seemingly at least moderately happy with it themselves.

I have made the mistake of thinking my image was good--it seemed to spark people into finding its faults.  It seems the more I say its good--the more criticism there is.   When I say I don't like it--people say I am crazy,

Rodd

[AngryDonkey]

1 hour ago, Rodd said:

Astrobn tends to be a like place--not a personal critique place like this forum.

These are pretty much my thoughts and the main reason I have gone off it to be honest. There is a lot of 'serial liking' going on ? ! It's great to get a pat on the back but I would much prefer a small comment or critique. I once suggested that Astrobin should remove the 'Like' button from the 'image feed' pages i.e. suggesting that people should really see the entire image and not just a small cropped preview version before 'liking' it but that was a no go. There are some really great images being uploaded but for various reasons (e.g. the general volume of images being uploaded, time of the day, lack of 'followers', the way the global stream works etc.) they disappear down the bottom without much recognition, which is a shame and takes a bit away from other similar images with lots of 'likes'... 

Like you said, for me it's great for planning purposes and to see what other people can achieve with similar equipment and also to send out links to family and friends so they can have a look.

[Rodd]

1 hour ago, vlaiv said:

I think I'm missing the point of this thread (probably entirely my fault).

What are we discussing here? Mechanisms by which people like images? "True" comparison between two images in terms of "likes deserved"? Fact that there are "under liked" images out there?

All or none of the above?

 

ALL